Moving from flying the Sabre to the phantom

[Pangur]

I have an idea for a time line that I want to write however a part of my research I need to work out how long it would take for a Sabre pilot to transition fully to a F-4 and how long wth would take for a Sabre pilot to qualify as RIO on an F4?

[Dilvish]

Originally Posted by Pangur

I have an idea for a time line that I want to write however a part of my research I need to work out how long it would take for a Sabre pilot to transition fully to a F-4 and how long wth would take for a Sabre pilot to qualify as RIO on an F4?

Pangur,

You might be able to find the answer at this forum, www.tgplanes.com.

good luck!

[Riain]

It wouldn`t take a RAAF pilot particularly long, the RAAF transitioned from early model Canberras to F4Es and then to F111C between 1969 and 1974. A RAAF Sabre pilot would already be a highly skilled dogfighter and would just need to convert to the particular characteristics of the Phantom and then learn the avionics. Certainly less than a year.

[Pangur]

Thanks guys. What I have in mind is this. As part of a deal for more Aussie involvement in Vietnam the RAAF get the F-4 early say 1967 and they send a squadron to Vietnam. Before they go they exercise a lot against Sabres and when they get there they are allowed to fly over North Vietnam. As a result of the extra training they start to mount up kills against the NVAF. The idea is to get one if not two aces

[Tovarich]

I'm no expert here, but wasn't one of the things about the Phantom, especially Vietnam-era, that it actually wasn't a dogfighter but rather a missile-platform, and that's why so many got their arses kicked by Migs?

Plus Sabres were solo-piloted, so the pilot would have to get used to a 'back seat driver' on Phantoms, which I imagine is a very different experience.

[Matt Wiser]

Here's some things to keep in mind:

1) The transition for a pilot jumping from one plane to another is usually-by USN or USAF standards-about six months. New pilots fresh from Training Command take about a year because they need to be taught their weapons and tactics courses. If said F-86 drivers have no Air-to-Ground experience, then it'll take about a year before being declared combat-ready because they'll need air-to-ground weapons delivery training before getting into an F-4-there's no way the USAF instructors will let it go any other way.

2) RAAF F-4Ds by early '67? If it's delivery date of Jan-Feb '67, then it's plausible. Earliest they could deploy for combat is July or Aug '67. They'd be broken in to hit Route Package 1, which is the NVN Panhandle, before going up to Route Package 6 (Hanoi and Haiphong).

3) Aces? Maybe one crew. But remember the bombing restrictions in March '68 which limited bombing to below the 20th Parallel, and the bombing halt altogether on 31 Oct 68. You'd have to wait until LINEBACKER I in 1972 before they'd really have a chance at getting their five kills. It took Steve Ritchie and Chuck DeBellevue from 10 May 72 to 28 Sep 72 to get their five.

4) There will be POWs. A few Aussies, maybe a couple dozen, will in all eventuality wind up in the Hanoi Hilton and its associated prisons before all is said and done.

[Riain]

There are a lot of possible RAAF in Vietnam scenarios; the Sabres in Thailand could be transferred to Vietnam when the ATVV was formed, Mirages could go, our Canberras could be swapped out for 3rd generation models, or as you suggest we could get the Phantoms early.

A problem with the Phantom was that it was a short term lease deal. There was a serious issue about what to do about the one we crashed, using them in combat will bring about worse losses which will cause even more problems with the lease.

[Matt Wiser]

I don't think he's thinking the lease: a full-blown sale of F-4Ds (and Es later) seems to be my impression. And from reading a couple books on the Phantom story, McAir was pushing hard for a sale-not the lease-as early as '65.

[Riain]

I didn`t see the bit about the Aces. Considering the USN only got 1 ace and the USAF a mere handful I doubt the RAAF could generate an ace in Vietnam. However if you have a Korean Meteor pilot with a kill or two on the board get some victories in Vietnam then you get close to having a RAAF Ace.

[Riain]

Originally Posted by Matt Wiser

I don't think he's thinking the lease: a full-blown sale of F-4Ds (and Es later) seems to be my impression. And from reading a couple books on the Phantom story, McAir was pushing hard for a sale-not the lease-as early as '65.

Yeah, no it`s not going to happen. By 1963 we had comitted to buy 110 Mirage III E all weather fighter-bombers and 24 F111C strike aircraft and shortly after 10 Skyhawks for the RAN. There is no room in the force structure of the mid 60s for a Phantom buy. The only reason we got Phantoms was because by the late 60s it was clear that the F111C was going to take a while to get airborne and the Canberra was ratshit in the high-end strike role. Even then it was only a stop-gap measure, although I have in mind a TL to keep them in 1973 to replace the 19 Mirages we crashed between 1964 and 1972 and the 10 Canberras we kept on strength until 1982.

[Matt Wiser]

One way to get combat-experienced aircrew in F-4s before forming the first RAAF squadron would be to have some fly exchange tours with the USAF. That way, there'd be a number of experiened pilots and navigators with F-4 combat time in their logbooks prior to the first squadron standing up. And this would include anyone being considered for command.

[Riain]

The RAAF had used it`s Sabres in combat in Malaya, indeed prior to 2003 the last fighter RAAF combat was a couple of Sabres strafing CT positions as part of the Malayan Emergency in 1960. They also did some serious air to air shadow boxing with the TNI-AF in the Konfrontasi in the early 60s.

[Pangur]

Thank you for spending the time to give a well thought out and laid out responce

Originally Posted by Matt Wiser

Here's some things to keep in mind:

1) The transition for a pilot jumping from one plane to another is usually-by USN or USAF standards-about six months. New pilots fresh from Training Command take about a year because they need to be taught their weapons and tactics courses. If said F-86 drivers have no Air-to-Ground experience, then it'll take about a year before being declared combat-ready because they'll need air-to-ground weapons delivery training before getting into an F-4-there's no way the USAF instructors will let it go any other way.

I am pretty sure than RAAF Sabre pilots have quite a bit of training for Air-to-ground.

Originally Posted by Matt Wiser

2) RAAF F-4Ds by early '67? If it's delivery date of Jan-Feb '67, then it's plausible. Earliest they could deploy for combat is July or Aug '67. They'd be broken in to hit Route Package 1, which is the NVN Panhandle, before going up to Route Package 6 (Hanoi and Haiphong).

I had the F-4E in mind and having them in combat a year later then you suggest. The reason for going for an E rather than a D is the internal cannon.

Originally Posted by Matt Wiser

3) Aces? Maybe one crew. But remember the bombing restrictions in March '68 which limited bombing to below the 20th Parallel, and the bombing halt altogether on 31 Oct 68. You'd have to wait until LINEBACKER I in 1972 before they'd really have a chance at getting their five kills. It took Steve Ritchie and Chuck DeBellevue from 10 May 72 to 28 Sep 72 to get their five.

I will be more than happy with a single crew making ace. The restrictions that you have called out is an issue. Wonder if I am better of waiting until 72 for the crew to make ace?

Originally Posted by Matt Wiser

4) There will be POWs. A few Aussies, maybe a couple dozen, will in all eventuality wind up in the Hanoi Hilton and its associated prisons before all is said and done.

Very much taken as a given

[Pangur]

Originally Posted by Riain

Yeah, no it`s not going to happen. By 1963 we had comitted to buy 110 Mirage III E all weather fighter-bombers and 24 F111C strike aircraft and shortly after 10 Skyhawks for the RAN. There is no room in the force structure of the mid 60s for a Phantom buy. The only reason we got Phantoms was because by the late 60s it was clear that the F111C was going to take a while to get airborne and the Canberra was ratshit in the high-end strike role. Even then it was only a stop-gap measure, although I have in mind a TL to keep them in 1973 to replace the 19 Mirages we crashed between 1964 and 1972 and the 10 Canberras we kept on strength until 1982.

Matt is correct, I had purchase in mind. Initially where I was thinking was that the US were more than willing to allow them to sold at very reduced price. However maybe the crashed Mirages and Canberra's open another option that I was not even aware off- thanks for that. I think I have to give up on having this happen in the late 60`s and move it to the early 70`s. That's cool, I opened this thread so that I can get this very sort of feedback and not come up with a wank thread

[Riain]

For a good PoD have a look at the Sabre deployment to RAAF Ubon Thailand.

I don`t know why you want the Phantom when we have brand new and very advanced for their day Mirages. A Mirage role over the North could be very beneficial for the entire Mirage fleet with things like ECM, later model sidewinders and inflight refuelling needing to be fitted. The Mirage could be used alongside the USAF F104C deployment as a lighter fighter to counter the Mig21.

I thought of the crashed Mirages and the retention of Canberras until 1982 as justification for keeping the OTL Phantoms, they certainly are not a justification for buying them in 1967.

[Pangur]

Originally Posted by Riain

For a good PoD have a look at the Sabre deployment to RAAF Ubon Thailand.

I don`t know why you want the Phantom when we have brand new and very advanced for their day Mirages. A Mirage role over the North could be very beneficial for the entire Mirage fleet with things like ECM, later model sidewinders and inflight refuelling needing to be fitted. The Mirage could be used alongside the USAF F104C deployment as a lighter fighter to counter the Mig21.

I thought of the crashed Mirages and the retention of Canberras until 1982 as justification for keeping the OTL Phantoms, they certainly are not a justification for buying them in 1967.

The only reasons that I went for the Phantom was that it has longer range and as an US built aircraft there would be no danger of a support issue like there was with the Gustav's. If that issue is not there then for sure going for the Mirage has got a lot of potential . Do you think that the French would have got awkward?

[Riain]

I don`t think so. In any case our own aviation industry was pretty strong in the mid 60s, we built the Mirages ourselves and that included fabricating many crucial parts including vital engine components from scratch domestically. I doubt the French would do to us what they did to Israel.

[Pangur]

Originally Posted by Riain

I don`t think so. In any case our own aviation industry was pretty strong in the mid 60s, we built the Mirages ourselves and that included fabricating many crucial parts including vital engine components from scratch domestically. I doubt the French would do to us what they did to Israel.

damn, that's right OK, fair enough got to get reading up on the Mirage

[Riain]

It`s a good plane, I got look in the cockpit of one of ours a few months ago, I don`t know if I could fit my fat arse in there if I ever got a chance. I know my fat arse fits in a Hornet, its surprisingly comfortable, perhaps because it`s so well laid-out.

[Matt Wiser]

When it comes to an ace crew, it'll have to be '72. MiG encounters below the 20th parallel in '68 were not common, though several did so, and were splashed.

The Es arrive in-theater in late '68-after the bombing halt. A short-term use of Ds, to get some seat time in F-4s, before getting the Es (Israel and Iran were the first E FMS customers, btw) is a strong possiblity. That, or having pilots chosen for the F-4 fly an exchange tour with the USAF gets you some drivers familiar with the plane, not to mention experience over Hanoi.

Having one or more of the exchange pilots wind up in the Hanoi Hilton is a very possible. With everything that entails......The '72 shootdowns were treated a lot better, because POW treatment improved after Ho Chi Minh's death, due to POW/MIA families and the U.S. Government (thanks to two POWs who'd been early-released blowing the whistle on the torture and mistreatment) "going public."

McAir was pushing an F-4 sale to the RAAF as early as '65. And Republic, who was about to shut down the F-105 production line in '67, was also trying to find customers for the Thud: I'll bet where their archives are, there's a sales pitch to the RAAF-and several other air forces-sitting in a box somewhere.